MRG Tests 2013

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by BoerenkoolMetWorst, Feb 5, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Pain of Salvation

    Pain of Salvation Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Posts:
    399
  2. Solarlynx

    Solarlynx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Posts:
    2,015
    Yes, Webroot is here :thumb: - how could you not see it?
    DefenceWall is here :thumb:
    No AppGuard :thumbd:
    No Comodo :thumbd:
    They might consider including NVT ExeRadar as well.
     
  3. SLE

    SLE Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Posts:
    361
    Where? Can't see it in report.

    Mhm. Default settings, PUA in the testset and f.e. Kaspersky detects it all? Seems strange:ninja:
     
  4. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    7,983
  5. Solarlynx

    Solarlynx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Posts:
    2,015
    I meant the OP, obviously you meant the report. Webroot isn't there, sorry I didn't understand what you meant.
     
  6. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,978
    I like their revised Methodology Used in the Tests & Samples criteria :thumb:

    I "think" the reason why SAS always does so poorly, taken from what i've noted in their updates www over the years, it's "possibly" not because the're not capable of doing better, but they don't have nearly as many DEFS as other vendors !

    Having said that, other tech built into SAS should prevent more fails, why it doesn't ?
     
  7. raven211

    raven211 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Posts:
    2,567
    I'm pretty sure he meant that Quarri needs the runtime library of Java, and Java is a very targeted runtime library hence posing a risk for any PC running it.
     
  8. nine9s

    nine9s Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2013
    Posts:
    310
    Location:
    USA
    Interesting that Avast got 100%, with user input, even though the samples included potentially unwanted applications and Avast was set to default (where it does not detect potentially unwanted programs.)
     
  9. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,592
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Personally, I am very disappointed with this latest MRG test.

    It is applicable to WIN 7 x86 only. Many of the AVs tested do not have equal protective features under x64. NIS 2013 for example does not protect against global hooking, keyloggers, and the like under x64.

    Then there is the testing methodolgy. All that was tested was user initiated downloads via IE. Next, equal weight was given to context and full system scan detection. How many non-technical users do context scans after a download? The PUA sample size was very small and I didn't see adware mentioned so I assume no samples existed in this category.
     
  10. FOXP2

    FOXP2 Guest

    One might reason the PUA (or PUP as avast! calls it), carrying additional payload, was most likely snagged by another Shield as its malicious activities progressed.

    Perhaps the auto sandbox thing and where the Cloud is queried and returns that "as yet unrecognized" dialogue prompting a user decision? Sorry, I forget the exact wording and process events for this example. :doubt:

    Yet, 100% is 100% even tho not for The Masses.
     
  11. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,978
    Probably not many :( But they also tested whether the sample is detected, or not, when it's executed.
     
  12. avman1995

    avman1995 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    Posts:
    944
    Location:
    india
  13. SLE

    SLE Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Posts:
    361
    Then it should be zero. But it's complete nonsense to shows figures or diagrams without numbers...
     
  14. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,592
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    This is like going back 10+ years ago and applying test methodlogies that were applicable at that time.

    No wonder so many participants did so well. Again one of the lamest tests I have seen in some time.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.